Someone else said this but it's the perfect place to repeat it: McCain's running for Prisoner of War of the United States, not President.

The McCain camp should be cautious about raising this issue too much because 5 1/2 years as a pow raises the issue of PTSD and general mental instability. You just don't want this guy's finger on the red button. The media has been cautious about raising this issue, but it's irresponsible not to.

Posted at August 28, 2008 3:25 PM in response to New Ad To Run In Minneapolis Is All About McCain's POW Past

I actually think Hillary has higher negatives than Obama on a bad day. Support for Obama is based on the fact that he's a better candidate.

It's worrisome that McCain's polls are doing as well as they are, but even Bush has 30%. Throw in the 10-20% that don't want tax increases, and there you go. Obama's got his work cut out for him.

The polls are going to bounce around for the rest of the summer. I want to see what happens 1) when they both have their VP's, and 2) after the debates.

I'm not worried.

Posted at August 4, 2008 5:58 PM in response to Denver: A "Biography" Convention Would Be a Disaster

Ii>all you gotta do is two things: Stay outta debt, and control your reproduction (I said control, not eliminate!)

You forgot to add a third requirement: don't get sick! If you do, you might lose your health insurance, and then you're up sh*# creek, for sure!

Posted at July 2, 2008 5:52 PM in response to A Warning For Young Workers: The Up-Escalator May Be Broken

It is far less friendly than in the 70's and it's ridiculous to cite unemployment figures and suggest otherwise. Unemployment statistics today don't tell the whole truth - if you're underemployed as a part-timer or a contract employee - you're counted as part of the employed.

Another positive factor in the 70's - the safety net wasn't as eroded as it is now. Health care was less expensive. There were more manufacturing jobs, less illegal labor. It's a different ball game today.

Posted at July 2, 2008 4:15 PM in response to A Warning For Young Workers: The Up-Escalator May Be Broken

I'm a 63 year old who agrees with you. I think the job market is incredibly tougher for young people than it was for me when I was your age.

There has been a steady growth of corporate power and a steady erosion of union/labor power over the last 30 years, starting with Reagan's busting up the traffic controllers' union. We are where we are as a result:

- contract jobs with no benefits
- no healthcare benefits
- no pensions
- stagnant wages
- fewer manufacturing jobs
- more competition from illegal low wage labor

My parents had pensions. I won't - those jobs disappeared years ago, but I do have a 401k. I'm not saying you can't make it. I have a son who is doing very well, and another that is barely scraping by, but it's ingenuous to insist that this is the same labor market it was 30 years ago.

Posted at July 2, 2008 2:09 PM in response to A Warning For Young Workers: The Up-Escalator May Be Broken

Perhaps Steven covers this in his book, but another challenge for the young worker or the unskilled worker is the difficulty in finding permanent jobs. Typically, young workers are hired on a part-time basis or an on-call basis. Companies would rather hire 2 part-timers than one full-timer because they save on benefits. I see this as little more than a scam - we'll give you a job, but it won't have any benefits or hope of becoming a full-time permanent position.

There are many parents like Steven who see what's happening and worry not only for their kids, but for themselves because parents are providing many of their kids, struggling towards independence, with housing and/or financial aid at a time parents are trying to prepare for their own retirement.

Over the last 20 years we've slipped from being the financial dynamo of OUR parents to an economy that resembles post-war England.

Posted at July 2, 2008 12:12 PM in response to A Warning For Young Workers: The Up-Escalator May Be Broken

A second piece of advise: avoid home equity loans and credit lines like the plague, unless you have a very specific (or very necessary) home improvement planned.

I have an equity credit line for emergencies only. The interest rate is one point below prime, so it's better than a credit card. If you had an emergency and needed quick cash you wouldn't want to spend the time and trouble to get a loan, so it's there if you need it. I have zero credit card debt, so it works for me. I understand that it might not work for others if they're the kind who can't resist temptation.

Posted at January 25, 2008 10:38 AM in response to California Foreclosures More Than Double Record From Last Downturn

Well said.

Living beyond your means nowadays means paying healthcare premiums for your family, running 2 cars so you and your spouse can both get to work, buying groceries, clothes, and gas bills. It takes 2 incomes to do that, and I'm not talking about excess consumption.

This ain't your father's good old US of A.

Posted at January 24, 2008 2:55 PM in response to Burning the Consumer

I watched Nova also last night and agree with you that it was an excellent portrayal of the Dover court case.

Agree also that the right wing agenda continues on funded by wealth and well-meaning. but ignorant people. These are not stupid people, but they are driven by belief instead of rational thought. We, on the left, have our sacred cows, too, make no mistake, but on the right there is a different mentality. I'm thinking of John Dean's book "Conservatives Without Conscience" in which he makes the case that right wingers simply have an authoritarian brain that makes them susceptible to irrational belief in authority. Left wingers ask more questions. The issue for the left is how to effectively and powerfully refute the right wing agenda as the Dover case did. It took money and expertise. The right wing has just got the money, but not the expertise. If we can match the think tank money we'll win every time because right wing arguments, when exposed to sunlight, evaporate.

Posted at November 14, 2007 9:40 AM in response to Conservatism's Unintelligent Design

Incidentally, there are plenty of facts on the Physicians for National Healthcare Reform site that refute your claim that we'd only save 4.4% and all of that in the first year. That claim sounds wildly off to me.

http://www.pnhp.org/facts/single_payer_resources.php

Posted at November 13, 2007 3:49 PM in response to Universal Health Care—Not As Easy As It Looks